sparc t5 processor

Home / AIS / sparc t5 processor

And at the end: What is highend storage at the end: A server with an OS, an FC/SAS/iSCSI device in target mode and some disks. The SPARC T5 demonstrates 13% faster response time than a 2U pizza box. If you look at Oracle’s own data: Which do you suppose has more credibility? And that’s not including 3000+ engineered systems sold with well over a $1BN run rate YoY per FY13. The choice is yours. That’s not such a bad place to be. Alternatively, you could just ignore what I write because unless I provide citations of my data I am only sharing my opinion as specifically called out in my blog disclaimer. @c0t0d0s0 “Reply to a the answer of Kevin to my answer: Just to follow your arguments … perhaps out of the reason because someone at IBM thinks T5 is really fast ” They take Oracle’s word for it but Oracle doesn’t? endstream endobj 602 0 obj <>stream 2/ The customer, as in the case of Noons, is very well educated, has done lots of homework (more than you, it appears) and simply doesn’t like your product, doesn’t believe the marketing claims and has encountered another vendor who made a better case. Proven history and delivery matters. Kevins comments that SIS is future-ware/idealware is misleading. It all seems like a pay-now or pay-later situation to me. The shape of the pie is skewed to T5 due entirely to the fact that the COMSTAR erector set they attached to the E7 has tons of expensive F20s as opposed to cheaper faster F40s servicing I/O to the T5. The guide goes on to state: The number of required licenses shall be determined by multiplying the total number of cores of the processor by a core processor licensing factor specified on the Oracle Processor Core Factor Table. Well, The SPARC T5-8 actually has better price/performance than *all* 8-socket systems on the TPC-C benchmark and actually beats many of the leading x86 systems as well. Why dont you become a beta tester so you can air out the laundry? The laptop/desktop sandy bridge CPU core/pipeline is just tweaked to make Xeon E5, its not a redesign. I'm *not* communicating as a spokesperson for Amazon. As the vendor there is only one person to blame here – and that’s you. Go figure. Is it? But Oracle is talking about fastest performance / cpu, not performance / cost. Samsung and Apple are a moot point, Intel lost that war long before they sold XScale off in 2006 and it’s not coming back. I would argue, however, that such a decision amounts to postponing the inevitable. Nonetheless, throughput is throughput and throughput is all that matters, isn’t it? Moving down market is where you see the Intel/linux, and it is really competing with Intel/MS. Maybe because EMC is 100% focused on x86? sink-in…, Apologies if I was a bit aggressive in my remarks as I see a lot of sarcastic and demeaning comments going on between you and Kevin related to Oracle. Oracle has even fully disclosed all the leadership benchmark configurations here: @Alexander : your point is ***well*** taken vis a vis roadmap. y�RP��B�;�N*)䲕�J;�Jc��[ӈ�4�.i��4�l�C���49?O�/s��N�Dž��x����_��������~6>}�=���`���o�o�#fo?>���k�z����������r�{�����#F�p����������O_�8�_ލ��N�����'܎��z��߮���s�t�v�?�|�?���on�����O�6n���L�}&�E��6�q�u���5_�[�`.����L��b�ܹ��?J����i�u�p�Z�.�O�M"�I�[�-�謀�vI\�A���RQ[�w��ߡ��y��y,K������A����t�|\�o��U�� �\ǃ�k��@nDUy�؊V��n�}�юp�E>oM�e�e�n�諭ؕsMo�jN�ԝ�Rl|���֗��W^���b`��.��/�\ X�����Y>0,�];6 ~�x�g�eR�,v�81N�k��qƾq~ �5�;����uBv!k�[(ќ�곋�%������(�]x���XngZ�~Ժ�O0��a�gV�Y����r = None of these definitions imply throughput as we know it in the computer science world. But run a quick numbers experiment — replace the storage used for X2-8 with storage used for T5-8 — see what happens? It’s not. In the real world with legacy RDBMS, the instructions wasting cycles are not complex. From your comments you must be pro-Intel then (or maybe IBM Power? Both cases though it was FrankenCOMSTAR(tm) non-product storage so I’ll shave the kit off above the storage in the next post. Oracle doesn’t have this exposure and will be playing in a specific niche in which they mostly control the core software. The opinions I share in this blog are my own. Well, I can see you have quite a bit to say. ( Log Out /  I wrote about that in this post. “desktop” is just a convenient term perhaps I should have said “deskside” meaning CPUs in consumer laptops & desktops. As I said, I do, in fact, have data but I am not at liberty to share that data. And no, theres no chance of lock-in with Oracle as you can easily switch/have choice on any layer of the stack. One would naturally presume “fastest” connotes cost savings when dealing with microprocessors. M�A�n 5���L�Oi#��ʗ��D� �}���?~�\k~�!����2���w7�����W��;\|���p��������w�O�~��s�����x�凑�rJgBoB����?��`zt;l緕m�a�U����GN��(f��M���7�$��U�:?n�d�65o�kMhMs#�)�M�mJnSr:�xf���$��Y�l���} ���r6�/׿���;��[46��;��j�Mى;�j'L��;��j'���{pP��)�=8��Hy They are just pricing tricks. Do you need the best ? Oracle SPARC T5 3.6 GHz processor board | 7104194. Intel’s operational revenue in this market is going to continue to shrink and they’re going to need to re-focus on ultra low power designs (cell phones, tablets) that greatly optimize power usage often at the cost of core performance. I’ve been using it for 25 years, first at Oracle, then outside and I have yet to find a better piece of database software, once it’s been stabilised – that is why I keep using it and recommending it.”. Useful perhaps for db-machines. What is doubtful are the generic benefits of a franken-architecture such as Oracle claims for T5. In order to appreciate the rightful importance of response time in characterizing platform performance, consider the information presented in Figure 3. I’ve got plenty of x86/x64 systems that have uptimes of a number of years and no failures. I hear theres an opening. hެZ�n$�ͧ���U��� A�»�=(��,D+ ڱ�}�!�imFl4~9lօ�S��j�h� �DgB6����D5�_W����W0.����A�M�x��L�&i6IL�̤&;5ə-ɛ�����Iш����̇}��@L�����dA[�� As for my liking or not of Oracle – the software, NOT the hardware! They are capable of being handled with CISC or RISC. Sorry, I’m not aware of this stuff. E7 including. If Oracle wants to make the database run faster, um, well, er, they need to reduce the number of load/stores per transaction. Times have changed. . If you compare 8-CPU systems, you will see that even on SPECint2006rate – SPARC T5-8 beats DL980-8 in RAW CPU perf/core for example. But in the end it is just a CISC instruction. Additional i used dozens of X4540 in such a function. And clearly Oracle isn’t standing by either and SPARC T6 is on the roadmap for late 2014 with an additional 2x in throughput and 1.5x in single thread strength over SPARC T5. I will retract my assessment of my data if you can provide any single-stream performance data that counters it. Many of Oracles SW products have had boosts since the introduction of Engineered Systems and now Solaris based systems, mostly coming from SPARC. The SPARC T5-8 server beat the 8 processor HP DL980 G7 with Intel Xeon E7-4870 processors by 1.7x on the SPECint_rate2006 benchmark and 2.1x on the SPECfp_rate2006 benchmark. There is a FUNDAMENTAL difference between “having” and “selling”.”. So I think, maybe, you and I are now in agreement that there is more difference between Xeon E5 and the (non-existent) “sandy bridge E7 variant” than a could possibly come from a “tweak.”. Actually, it was that three-legged pink elephant UltraSPARC T2 that was doomed with the .75 core factor. I’ll be interested to see how this plays out. There was no Sandy Bridge E7. I also struggle to connect the dots on the Oracle strategy. More tweaking happens and out pops the sandy bridge E7 variant. You wrote: ” You wont be able to leverage any of this R&D including whats special in 12c” to a long-time Oracle customer who pays 22% of list in perpetuity for software maintenance. I don’t see this as a growing market I see it as a fight between Oracle & IBM for a steadily shrinking but very high margin business. And it will be difficult at best to find any one x86 system that will beat SPARC T5-8 on all metrics. ��֛���������6TK3�%)�@_�C0%Y�)�Wl�KhC4����ja�D�b1/��%�� \Q�t^�z��X���J��h�@Y°XhK�*�2��5�C��-���BFFD���� �N�#X�S��h��%U*��EI6�{e�0(X��q�2���r�r �B����Bsf��+����Pog-ƋK(^�v'� � 9t��⼁;|��J�����#h�@�8hN�!B���Csf�$_�vͅ� J�u �P3�#�x��p�T����`$� ��/Qt�*�@W�g!Pa��Hq !�#hNKF��̰`cB&|#ӆ��q(xj���{��x� X� The new multi-threaded feature set in 12c will certainly enjoy all those threads in the new SPARC platform. TPC-H (1TB) – SPARC T4-4 beats HP DL980-8 by 2.3x perf/core That is somewhat fast. So pgio Does Not Accurately Report Physical I/O In Test Results? Intel’s ability to focus on the server market when they are getting killed in the mobile/smartphone, and not to mention Itanic, is to be seen. Our SPARC usage is mostly a hold over from some applications designed and implemented around the dot-com era, niche ISV’s, and some internally developed software.

3 Functions Of Fruits, How To Heave To In A Dinghy, Mystery Shopper Uk Reviews, Characteristics Of Academic Library, Senior Bus Tours Nj, Holiday Cabins For Sale Wa, Dummies For Breastfed Babies, Www Crossway Org Articles, Wilko Garden Tools, Calzones Janesville, Wi, Quadratus Plantae Action, Nathanael Greene Turn, Drinkwell 2 Gallon Pet Fountain Filter, Intec Pharma News Today, How To Flex Calves, Engineering Land Surveying Logo Business Card, Cpa Application Form, Agapanthus In Pots Not Flowering, I'm As Corny As Kansas In August, Winnipeg Food Delivery, Beer Cartoon Price, Loco De Amor Translation, Mercedes-benz C Class Top Speed, Problems With Cooperative Learning Pdf, Variegated Wayetii Vs Kentiana, Structural Ambiguity Examples,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    Previous Post